Re: gnome2 port



El vie, 14-12-2001 a las 17:41, Dave Camp escribió:
> Here are my thoughts (some of which I've discussed with jpr) on the
> gnome2 port of anjuta2.
> 
> There are four modules that need to be ported:  gdl, gnome-debug,
> gnome-build, and anjuta2.
> 
> Gustavo has offered to port gdl.  Since scintilla has not been ported,
> initially the gnome2 port will not include the scintilla-control
> subdirectory.  This leaves the gdl/ and idl/ subdirectories.  This
> development will happen on HEAD, and a gdl-0-1-branch will be created
> for the gnome1.4 version, and the gdl version number will be bumped to
> 0.3.x.


I think that we should use unified branch names like gnome-1-4-branch,
this way the macros directory branch will be also shared between
modules.

> 
> At least until scintilla is ported (and perhaps afterward, we'll see) we
> will be using a GtkSourceView-based control, probably GlimmerFile.
> 
> I am currently rewriting gnome-debug using gnome2.  (Note that I said
> rewrite, not port).  This rewrite should start becoming useful sometime
> around the new year.  This isn't checked in yet, but when it is the
> gnome-debug-0-1-branch will be created, and gnome-debug version number
> will be bumped to 0.3.x
> 
> I don't know what the status of any potential gnome-build port is.
> 
> After gdl, gnome-debug, and gnome-build are ready for the gnome2
> platform, we can begin porting anjuta2.  I think it is important to wait
> until these modules are fully ported (in the case of gnome-debug, I want
> to wait until it's doing stuff) before we start with anjuta2  The three
> major parts are going to be libanjuta, the shell, and the plugins.
> 
> Here is my plan for the anjuta2 port:
> 
> I'd like to pot libanjuta2 and the shell.  This will involve porting the
> sample tool also, to make sure things work.  I think this will take one
> weekend, so it shouldn't block on me for long.  The major changes here
> will be:
> 
> * rewriting the dialog stuff in anjuta-utils.c to use GtkDialog
> * Using GtkTreeView instead of etable for the plugin manager
> * Using gconf instead of gnome-config for the plugin manager (this may
> not be necessary at first)
> * Updating for the new APIs, in particular the oaf->bonobo-activation
> change and other minor changes.
> 
> After that we can begin porting plugins.  Once the shell is ported we
> can just have a plugin-porting free-for-all (except that the project and
> debugger tools should probably be taken care of by the people that
> port/rewrite gnome-build and gnome-debug).
> 
> So is everyone ok with doing the port soonish?  There are some
> downsides:
> 
> * All the anjuta2 developers will need to keep a relatively up-to-date
> gnome2 environment
> * We add two new dependencies (gtksourceview and glimmer) to anjuta2,
> bringing us to a hefty 6 total modules).
> * We'll probably run into bugs in the gnome2 platform that we'll have to
> either fix ourselves or wait for other people to fit.  That'll be a bit
> annoying.
> 
> Personally I would like to start the ports of
> gdl/gnome-build/gnome-debug as soon as possible.  Any thoughts?
> 
> -dave
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-devtools mailing list
> gnome-devtools gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devtools
-- 
Carlos Perelló Marín
mailto:carlos gnome-db org
mailto:carlos perello hispalinux es
http://www.gnome-db.org
http://www.Hispalinux.es
Valencia - Spain

Attachment: pgptV5TusCyYf.pgp
Description: PGP signature



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]